The effect of multilateral on the termination of the deposit contract A comparative study


  • Dhamear Hussein Almamoory University of Babylon/College of Law
  • Ahmad Raed Jadeer Al-Obeidi University of Babylon/College of Law


deposit, deposit contract, multilateral contract, Expiry of the deposit contract, plurality


Plurality is a description attached to the obligation, or the right to modify its effects after it was limited to two parties. Polygamy, as a description of the obligation or right, may be attached to the deposit contract, making it a multi-party contract. And since the multiplicity of parties, of course, changes the effects of the simple contract, so the study of the impact of this multiplicity in the deposit contract is important, in terms of standing on the effects of this contract in the presence of multiplicity of parties, and this change in the effects applies starting from the stage of concluding the contract Until it expires, the contract may expire with respect to one of the multiple parties without the rest, and it may expire against all of them.This difference in how the contract ends in the presence of multiple parties is due to the desire of the contracting parties in the manner in which they want the contract to end in light of their plurality, and the desire of the multiple parties is known by knowing the nature of their plurality, whether it is in a single contract. The termination of the contract with the fulfillment of one of the cases of termination for one of them without the rest; This is due to the impossibility of meeting at work, or the plurality of separate contracts, and therefore the contract does not require working together; Which does not affect the termination of the contract for one of them on the rest. Knowing whether polygamy is a single contract or separate contracts, just as it has a role in explaining the effect of the termination of the deposit contract when there are multiple parties. The same applies to the nature of the deposited money in terms of whether it is shared among depositors or not. The fact that the money is shared indicates that the termination of the contract of one of the depositors without the rest will be affected by this joint money because he does not own the deposit alone until it is returned to him in full, which requires looking at the fact that the joint money is of the same, which indicates the possibility of returning his share of the deposit and with this return the deposit contract ends with respect to It belongs only to him without the rest, or is the shared money from the values that need the satisfaction of the remaining depositors Without achieving this satisfaction from the rest, the deposit contract is subject to termination for all depositors.